Creationists: can you come up with some experiments that actually test your 'science'?

Question

otherwise, do you honestly think it needs to be discussed in a science class?

pwwatson: something from nothing is NOT evolution

sean: if you really think that then you have no scientific background.

bg: despite the missing links (which are less than you think) there is abundant evidence that evolution is true. give me some scientific evidence for creation that warrants it being in a science class

brothermichael: it has been tested in the lab. where have you been? have you ever taken antibiotics? they are developed based on evolution of micro-organisms.

marcus75: evolution permeates all branches of science including medicine. the rest of the developed world teaches it without issue... since the worlds scientists came to a consensus over 100 years ago on evolution and it's believed by the worlds scientists today, from all branches of science, don't you think it's important ???

bigrichguy: nice joke. but i want to stress, evolution is not the origin of life on the planet. evolution is what happened from the first organism(s) onwards

torobyte: that is one of the dumbest excuses i've ever heard. evolution is not the origin of life, is what's happened after. plus, do you think scientists believe that a man was the first life form?? i'm sure it was something very simple... like the simple lifeforms still present on this planet today

alleninthehills: see, you people don't even know what evolution is. how many times must it be said: evolution is not about the origin of the first life on this planet. it's about what happened after that (branching etc.).

talleymark: I appreciate the honesty. just to point out, only creationist really distinguish macro- from microevolution. and there is evidence for macro-. also, when there have been problems with science, the scientific community is usually quick to correct it. that's the beauty of science, it's self correcting because as scientists, we are skeptical of everything

Answer 1

You might as well give up trying to get a good debate.

The creationist theory posits that God just made the world. Meanwhile he was planting evidence of past civilizations and dinosaur bones to confuse us.

Answer 2

Lol pwwatson: Evolution is not random, but it has no fixed outcome or result. It's built on DNA and powered by mutations and natural selection. Creationism is the true randomness - it said a "supernatural" unnamed entity made everything at once -- gee, that explains everything. I should never have been silly enough to ask a question about nature -- it' all a god.

I guess we might as well dunk germ theory, too. Or gravity -- gravity must be god's way of hugging matter.

Answer 3

I read some reports on the experiments done for (macro)evolution. Sincerely, I was shocked to see that the reports were lies. So up till now, I stick to creationism till I get some convincing evidence. This is because it is easier for me to believe we are created by someone than been to beign as a result of chance.
I know the best attitude a scientist needs is to accept the things which are observed, eventhough it is not what he expects. So the theory of (macro)evolution still stands a chance if at all it's true and has enough evidence.

Answer 4

Well, I can't think of any experiments which test the theory of evolution either....at least none which would time out in much less than a few hundred thousand years. Fruit fly mates with fruit fly mates with fruit fly....after thousands of generations, all you've got is fruit fly.

Perhaps Creationism doesn't belong in a science class. However, why should evolution then be thrust in front of developing minds as the only acceptable explanation? If schools are not going to allow for alternate viewpoints, then how is that better than the religious systems which you deride?

Answer 5

Do you really expect anything scientific from a group that still insists "Their is no irrefutable proof that evolution exists, and hence why it is still called the Theory of Evolution"?

Answer 6

Can you come up with any experiments that test evolution? Neither can be proven using scientific methods of testing. We rely on the evidence, much like a legal case. We all have the same evidence, it is a matter of interpreting the evidence, and what makes the most sense considering the evidence we have.

Answer 7

oh my..."hence it is the theory of evolution" well gravity is a theory too. drop a pen and if "god wants" it will drop "of course if he doesn't" it wont. oh my...
the two ideas have been fought to the point of exhaustion and in the end the one with the most evidence won.

Answer 8

Here's a hypothetical experiment:

Suppose you have a giant bowl. You throw in this bowl, concrete, lumber, glass, wiring, etc. In other words, everything you would need to build a nice house. You then shake and spin this bowl. You hit it with lightning, heat, cold, radiation, water. You do this for millions of years. Do you actually think you'll have a fully built house from this? You most likely will answer, "impossible." In the end, you will need "intelligent design" to make this house. Now this is just a simple house. What about the complex nature of DNA and life itself? Still think we're just an accident?
Yes, I do think this should be discussed in every classroom that continues to spew the lie of evolution and accidental life. Science treats evolution as a fact, when in reality, it's just a theory due to some similarities of life and some old bones.

Answer 9

Above me: LOL. You gotta be joking. Your experiment is to pray and no matter what happens it proves God? Try this experiment: Pray to a unicorn and you will get the same results. The unicorn will answer you if it wants to and if it doesn't, it obviously it doesn't want to, so it exists. Hah!

Answer 10

I dont call it a science, its a belief. Its hard to test evolution, due to time, but honestly- i dont really care if it is or isnt taught.